Any critique on either would be hugely helpful - be honest, I understand the value of a thorough critique. I'm a novice in the fiction world. This is my first attempt and you are all so knowledgeable. (The novel, a science-spy-thriller called The Malthusian Trigger, is complete at 140k words.) Also any recommendations on which to put first would be appreciated.

Thanks.

Commonwealth Avenue, Boston
James West stood with his feet planting firmly on the rubber trolley floor, one hand wrapped around a pole and his eyes shut in concentration. The green trolley car swayed beneath him as it rumbled along the tracks carrying its passengers; lawyers, students, clerks, and the homeless. Oblivious to those around him, Professor James West was lost in thoughts of another people, the Roman Empire, its rise to power and its enormous collapse, about the mathematical causes for the great calamity of life. Tonight, however, there was only one life that was in danger, only one world in risk of collapse.
“Boston U. East,” the trolley driver slurred loudly, as if years of saying the names of trolley stops had worn away his ability to speak.

Paranal, Chile, 3 years earlier
It was an unusual place for a murder.
The great dome was 75 feet tall, not quite equal to the 100 foot main vault of Notre Dame de Paris, but more than the 60 foot Dome of the Rock.
The skin of the dome was steel sheeting, stretched across as skeleton of blue steel ribs supporting a network of catwalks. The interior was filled with the enormous superstructure of silver and blue steel struts and cross-braces, some big enough for a man to crawl through, looking like the web of a great mechanical spider suspended between the two ends of a fork. On the side of the fork with a 20 foot chain-driven gear. The sole purpose of the structure is to hold the primary 25 foot mirror in place to within a miliarcsecond accuracy while

I would suggest on version one, that "feet planting" be changed to "feet planted" so tenses match, and that the second time you mention james west, james is superfulous(?) unless you are using this to establish that he thinks of himself like this. You could have cute bit on how his mom/dad named him after the TV show character, and he turns out to be a mild mannered professor. Also, I would not think math would cause the fall of an empire, but could quantify, measure or describe the fall.

I'll think about the suggestion about the tv character too.

West is a bit idiosyncratic – he has this belief in mathematical causes for a lot of human events. (I’m biased because I did some research in this area: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/09/050901073153.htm ) The hope is that it adds a little creepy edge to an otherwise likable character.

Perhaps you are right that the description in the second paragraph is too much info for a opener. I enjoy a good creepy setting (It’s in an observatory) but maybe it shouldn’t come until after we’ve put a gun to our hero’s head.

Thanks again, very helpful. I’ve written a textbook and plenty of nonfiction, but this is my first foray into fiction.

[This message has been edited by Bill (edited June 27, 2007).]

Like Deb, I liked the first opening better, because it has character and movement. I also like the title. I was uneasy, though, about his name, too close to 'James Bond' for my taste - but that could be just me.

The second might work as a prologue if you could trim some of the detail and zoom in on the body. For example, you could perhaps drop 'some big enough for a man to crawl through,' and 'On the side of the fork with a 20 foot chain-driven gear.' (-- and should 'with' have been 'was'?) without losing anything, and show us the body instead.

A tense nit: 'The sole purpose of the structure was', not is.

Finally, I'm not sure the precise dimensions are necessary: it's big, that's the point, right?

Hope this helps,
Pat

"...about the mathematical causes for the great calamity of life." I know what you mean, but this is confusing at best and wrong at worst. You are telling us that life IS a calamity. Why not delete "of life"?

I would avoid the word "miliarcsecond" since most people will not know that is a measure of angle rather than of time.

Being from Boston (that's "Bawstin" to all of you who weren't born there) myself I'm already interested since I'll know the areas where things happen.

It's hard to answer your question from just 13 lines. I think the second section has great potential as a prologue. I'm not sure you want to jump back in time for the second chapter.

If you need the prologue:

I'd keep the first line - It was great - but only give me as much of the description of the building/ dome as absolutely necessary to follow up on the murder reference. I don't care that it's smaller than Notre Dame's vault.

If you want to check out a great prologue with a murder check out - Stephen Horn's Law of Gravity . That one starts off with a description of what the body hit as it fell off the building as the Officer on the scene mentally reconstructs the event. Highly recommended reading.

On the first opening:

There is nothing wrong with the writing but some trimming would be helpful so you don't have to tease. The narration is a bit distant. Who is telling the story? Whose POV is this or is it Full Omni?

If you are going to tell me the street and city, tell me the year too. The trolleys ran for a long time and then stopped. I think they've started back up again but can't be sure since I'm in Virginia now.

Most of these are nits:

James West I didn't have a James Bond moment but I did have an Adam West and Batman one stood with his feet planting planted firmly <-- planted gives you this adverb. Cut it. on the rubber trolley floor, one hand wrapped around a pole and his eyes shut in concentration. The green I don't need to know the color and you can cut "trolley" since you already told me that trolley car swayed beneath him as it rumbled along the tracks carrying its passengers; lawyers, students, clerks, and the homeless. Actually, you could lose this entire sentance and not hurt as far as I can tell the story Oblivious to those around him, than how did he tell us about the passangers? Also, since his eyes are shut, I'd presume he's ignoring the others on the trolley He was lost in thoughts of another people, the Roman Empire, its rise to power and its enormous collapse, about the mathematical causes for the great calamity of life. Tonight, however, there was only one life that was in danger, only one world in risk of collapse. But you've already told me he was only thinking about Rome and math. If he's trying to save someone isn't this going to be his focus? Don't tease - just tell me.
“Boston U. East,” the trolley driver slurred loudly, Having been there - it's usually "B.U. East" in a grunt or mutter. There is really no "s" sounds for him to slur. Again, you don't have to use the word "trolley" again. Call him the conductor.

I LOVE this ---> as if years of saying the names of stops had worn away his ability to speak.

You use "trolley" four times in those 13 lines.

If you want to shoot me chapters 1 and 2 I'll let you know what I think about the prologue/starting point issues. Just so you know, I will not get back to you before the 9th of July. I have a bunch to get comments back to before yours and am hoping to finish them while I'm in Maine over the 4th.

Now, My take:

quote:

---

[Professor, right?]James West stood with his feet plant[ed][<--How else would he be standing? [firmly<--I agree with my illustrious collegue kings_falcon here: Cut it.] [on the rubber trolley floor<--Where else would he be standing?],[This is where the sentence should begin:Professor James West rode the trolley with] one hand wrapped around a pole and his eyes shut in concentration. [The green trolley car swayed beneath him as it rumbled along the tracks carrying its passengers; lawyers, students, clerks, and the homeless.<--This is out of POV because of this-->]Oblivious to those around him, [Professor James West<--Starting here, you should be calling him what he thinks of as his name: James; Jim; J.J.; etc.] was lost in thoughts of another people, the [Roman Empire<--was a place; Ancient Romans were the people.], [its<--non-cohesive to the people, replace with: their] rise to power and [Deleted] enormous collapse[;] about the mathematical causes for the great calamity of life. [Tonight, however, there was only one life that was in danger, only one world in risk of collapse.<--Is he thinking this? If so, Why? Whose life is in danger? If not, it doesn't belong in his POV.]
“Boston U. East,” the trolley driver [slurred loudly<--just use "said", or -- if you must -- "yelled". End the tag simply, make the last a seperate sentence: It sounded] as if years of [saying the names of<--Suggest something stronger, like: belting out the trolley stops had worn away his ability to [speak<--[articulate ].

---

^This seems to be the beginning. The following should be filtered in throughout the story. As it is, it seems more like a distracted info-dump:

quote:

---

It was an unusual place for a murder.[Where? What murder? Whose murder?]
The great dome was 75 feet tall, not quite equal to the 100 foot main vault of Notre Dame de Paris, but more than the 60 foot Dome of the Rock.[<--I don't care about the size of the unnamed dome. What about the murder?]
[The skin of the dome was steel sheeting, stretched across as skeleton of blue steel ribs supporting a network of catwalks. The interior was filled with the enormous superstructure of silver and blue steel struts and cross-braces, some big enough for a man to crawl through, looking like the web of a great mechanical spider suspended between the two ends of a fork.<--In this VERY long sentence, is there ANYTHING RELEVANT to the murder?] On the side of the fork with a 20 foot chain-driven gear. The sole purpose of the structure is to hold the primary 25 foot mirror in place to within a miliarcsecond accuracy while holding the secondary convex hyperbolic Beryllium mirror to maintain optimal focus. [You have totally digressed from the murder that you told me about.]

---

For this second offering:

1) Whose PoV?

2) Don't mention structural details unless, or until, they become important. They will have the opposite effect of intriguing a reader, it will bore them with banalities.

3) Once you mention the murder, the reader's attention will be attuned to that, incontrovertibly.

I didn't have a problem associating James West with Adam West at all. I believe -- if memory serves me -- that it WAS the character's name on Wild, Wild West, but that doesn't distract me from the story. The name James and the name West are fairly ambiguous. If you trim some of the extraneous banalities, I think there is a worthy read in there.

I went to grad school at BU, also the home of my childhood hero, Asimov. (and I haven’t grown up yet) And, yes, there is a Hari Seldon type of thing here. Also, yes, I tried and failed to be Hari Seldon at one point in my life. (partly tongue in cheek.)

I like a bit of excessive science, (Berylium mirror, miliarcseconds, etc.) but it’s useless if it only sounds good to me . I like to stir emotions with science/math and physical tension at the same time - at least that’s the goal.

About the setting for the murder: there are two astrophysicists. As you can guess, one kills the other. But it only makes sense after some build up to a big moment to get out the guy’s feelings and motives. Perhaps there should be a little dialog before the scene description. But I want the reader to guess a little about the location because the location is important for the rest of the book, and there is a theme of mixing religion and science that the cathedral reference is setting up. Hmmm… conflicts between dialog, setting, and action… I usually like to start scenes with dialog or character movement, but these two begin with setting. Would it be better to begin the scene with the sentence:

It was an unusual place to strangle a man.

That would at least give a graphic detail about the murder and mention a person, and seed a few questions: Who kills who? Why? Why here? What is he strangled with?

But that still doesn't fix the thing that everyone is saying, that the murder is more interesting than big steel struts...

quote:

---

The DaVinci Code is full of meaningless math jargon, and people believe it's the Gospal truth!

---

The word is Gospel. And, The DaVinci Code is not full of meaningless math jargon. Phi, which he calls the divine equation -- or something -- in his book has bearing on the "code" that his fictional DaVinci used in his artwork. He didn't just make up some meaningless jargon, he cites the book he references for the Phi information on his site. What people actually believed wasn't the jargon, it was the religious conspiracy, the fictional evidence of Christ and Mary, and the fraudulent documents that supported his claim about the existing Priory of Scion. The mathematics and symbolism that went into the DaVinci Code are there for a sound reason.

Jargon is used best when an actual character uses it, as part of his/her characterization. If the PoV is someone who would use the jargon, use it when the PoV would use it, not just for the sake of using it.

So my take. The second opening does not get my anywhere in the first 13. With that being said I like the feel it was giving me, I have read lots of books that start off something like that, a little wading to get out into the water so to speak but as long as the water is not too cold I will not give up. The second one thought I was not hooked in the 13 the water was not too cold for me. I really like the science stuff. I am a total science nut myself so I really get into it, but I think you should save it for the second page and on. If I can totally kill my analogy by using in one more time. Push the science further out and you will be able to develop that drop off that you don't expect when wading out into the water.

The First one has more of a hook. As IB and several others have said there is much you could take out of it to give you more room to develop further to really bring a reader in.

quote:

---

Wish I wrote as well as you edit IB.

---

When will I ever learn to type.

quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with 99% of what InarticulateBabbler has said.
----------------------------------------------------------------

I do as well.

For me, the second version caught my attention better, but then I lost track with all the description. The first version, with editing, is probably the best of the two.

First a little background. I’m a director for the Institute for Mathematical Methods in Counterterrorism as well as a math prof. In the short, I use math to find things that people are trying to hide. In the more public arena, I am just starting on a project using some of the computer algorithms I wrote to uncover hidden writings in ancient manuscripts. (See http://www.rit.edu/~930www/NewsEvents/2006/Oct01/t1.html or http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/3010_archimed.html for work by Roger Easton, my colleague at RIT, working on a manuscript of Archimedes.)

O.K., that said, anytime a book is written involving someone’s area of expertise, unless it is written by another expert, sounds silly. I’ll restrain from commenting on the misrepresentations of CERN and other scientific facts that Brown gets wrong. I liked that he presents the connections between science and faith, although his facts are loose there too. Those are small relative to the very serious flaws in The Da Vinci Code regarding Jesus and Mary and most of church history. (These have been very well documented to be, as IB said, fraudulent.) Even that might be forgivable were it not for his claim at the beginning of the novel that “all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals” are accurate. My point, agreeing with IB and Rick, is that science jargon and such can be good if it’s real (Tom Clancy, Michael Creighton) or clearly fictionalized. But like a character talking with a southern accent, it sounds silly if it isn’t done well.

I enjoyed reading some of Dan Brown’s other books, but had to put down the Da Vinci Code because it just got silly. (A&D crossed the silly threshold for me also.) But, hey, he’s sold millions of novels, so, even if it isn’t what we call good writing, it works. I even know a few mathematicians at the NSA who were inspired by Digital Fortress before taking up the classified mantle.

Back to the first 13…

The more I think about it, I am settling on keeping it with the Trolley scene first, with some trimming, because it has a person to care about. Then the water will be hot by the time the reader gets to the scientific description in the telescope.

As for the second paragraph, I hoped the read would be asking “how’s the guy gonna get killed? Crushed under the big thing? Trapped inside? Caught in the big gear? Whipped? Strangled? …”
There is a photo of the inside of the telescope at: http://www.atacamaphoto.com/paranal/paranal12.htm

Is anyone interested in reading the two chapters in full? I would love to email them out and get comments.

BTW - it's Michael Chrichton.

and

quote:

---

This just in: I got a positive response from a literary agent. His first comment, like King’s Falcon, was that I need to slash the 140k words to 70k-100k, or cut it in half to make 2 novels.

---

Congratulations on the positive response. You'd be surprised how much you can drop that number by trimming out what's not necessary.

As far as being a technical expert, if you can use it to write more power to you. I know for me I have tried in the past to use my technical knowledge for depth and it turns out that I have a really boring career. (IT Professional.) And the books that I have read that talk about my career field, even for the briefest instant, sound fake, so I do completely understand the need for an expertise before writing about something technical. I think there might be fodder here for another thread so...

In the end. Send them over. I will be glad to read.

IB - no offense taken. As I disclaim at the outset when I edit for folks, I think I am funny... some times I am not.

- Jeff